Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 45
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Weakening Of The Voting Rights Act: A Proposal For Modernizing Preclearance, Breannan Perez
The Weakening Of The Voting Rights Act: A Proposal For Modernizing Preclearance, Breannan Perez
Brigham Young University Prelaw Review
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed more than 58 years ago. However, despite its attempt to identity and address discrimination, many of its safeguards have been struck down by the Court. In fact, Section 4b aimed to eliminate voting procedures that were discriminatory in effect, but has since been deemed as unconstitutional. Such a ruling has weakened the VRA and has burdened minority voters. This article proposes a modernized preclearance formula that considers states’ voting rights violations and current voting data. Such a proposal is necessary as a disregard of any voter is a threat to the integrity …
A New Voting Rights Act For A New Century: How Liberalizing The Voting Rights Act’S Bailout Provisions Can Help Pass The Voting Rights Advancement Act Of 2017, Mario Q. Fitzgerald
A New Voting Rights Act For A New Century: How Liberalizing The Voting Rights Act’S Bailout Provisions Can Help Pass The Voting Rights Advancement Act Of 2017, Mario Q. Fitzgerald
Brooklyn Law Review
The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the coverage formula of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in Shelby County. v. Holder in 2013. Members of Congress have attempted to renew the VRA with an updated coverage formula through the Voting Rights Advancement Acts of 2015 and of 2017. Unfortunately, Congressional Republicans have not supported either bill. Even if passed in its current form, the Supreme Court is likely to strike down the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2017 (VRAA) for violating the principle of “equal sovereignty between the States” as set forth by the Court in Shelby County. Therefore, this note …
Section 2 After Section 5: Voting Rights And The Race To The Bottom, Ellen D. Katz
Section 2 After Section 5: Voting Rights And The Race To The Bottom, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Five years ago, Shelby County v. Holder released nine states and fifty-five smaller jurisdictions from the preclearance obligation set forth in section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). This obligation mandated that places with a history of discrimination in voting obtain federal approval—known as preclearance—before changing any electoral rule or procedure. Within hours of the Shelby County decision, jurisdictions began moving to reenact measures section 5 had specifically blocked. Others pressed forward with new rules that the VRA would have barred prior to Shelby County.
Inventing Equal Sovereignty, Leah M. Litman
Inventing Equal Sovereignty, Leah M. Litman
Michigan Law Review
The Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder relied on the “fundamental principle” and “historic tradition” of equal sovereignty to hold one of the Voting Rights Act’s key provisions unconstitutional. Yet almost three years after Shelby County, and despite a recent wave of equal sovereignty challenges to major federal programs, the equal sovereignty principle remains largely unexamined. This Article seeks to provide some clarity—both to establish the contours of the equal sovereignty doctrine and to evaluate whether it is a sound rule of constitutional federalism. The principle of equal sovereignty, as initially articulated by courts and subsequently …
Administering Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County, Christopher Elmendorf, Douglas Spencer
Administering Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County, Christopher Elmendorf, Douglas Spencer
Douglas M. Spencer
Until the Supreme Court put an end to it in Shelby County v. Holder, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act was widely regarded as an effective, low cost tool for blocking potentially discriminatory changes to election laws and administrative practices. The provision the Supreme Court left standing, Section 2, is generally seen as expensive, cumbersome and almost wholly ineffective at blocking changes before they take effect. This paper argues that the courts, in partnership with the Department of Justice, could reform Section 2 so that it fills much of the gap left by the Supreme Court’s evisceration of Section …
The Blinding Color Of Race: Elections And Democracy In The Post-Shelby County Era, Sahar F. Aziz
The Blinding Color Of Race: Elections And Democracy In The Post-Shelby County Era, Sahar F. Aziz
Sahar F. Aziz
No abstract provided.
Who Should Be Afforded More Protection In Voting – The People Or The States? The States, According To The Supreme Court In Shelby County V. Holder, Tara M. Darling
Who Should Be Afforded More Protection In Voting – The People Or The States? The States, According To The Supreme Court In Shelby County V. Holder, Tara M. Darling
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Transformation: Turning Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act Into Something It Is Not, J. Christian Adams
Transformation: Turning Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act Into Something It Is Not, J. Christian Adams
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Voter Rights And Civil Rights Era Cold Cases: Section Five And The Five Cities Project, Paula C. Johnson
Voter Rights And Civil Rights Era Cold Cases: Section Five And The Five Cities Project, Paula C. Johnson
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
An “Equal Sovereignty” Principle Born In Northwest Austin, Texas, Raised In Shelby County, Alabama, David Kow
An “Equal Sovereignty” Principle Born In Northwest Austin, Texas, Raised In Shelby County, Alabama, David Kow
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
The Path Forward From Shelby County V. Holder, Janet W. Steverson
The Path Forward From Shelby County V. Holder, Janet W. Steverson
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Arc Of Injustice: Pre- And Post-Decision Thoughts On Shelby County V. Holder, Janai S. Nelson
Arc Of Injustice: Pre- And Post-Decision Thoughts On Shelby County V. Holder, Janai S. Nelson
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
A Fugitive From The Camp Of The Conquerors: The Revival Of Equal Sovereignty Doctrine In Shelby County V. Holder, Vik Kanwar
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
On The Repeal Of The Voting Rights Act And The Breadth Of The Long Counter Revolution, Ifetayo M. Flannery
On The Repeal Of The Voting Rights Act And The Breadth Of The Long Counter Revolution, Ifetayo M. Flannery
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Backsliding: The United States Supreme Court, Shelby County V. Holder And The Dismantling Of Voting Rights Act Of 1965, Bridgette Baldwin
Backsliding: The United States Supreme Court, Shelby County V. Holder And The Dismantling Of Voting Rights Act Of 1965, Bridgette Baldwin
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
The Post-Shelby County Game, Steven R. Morrison
The Post-Shelby County Game, Steven R. Morrison
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Toward A Fundamental Right To Evade Law? The Rule Of Power In Shelby County And State Farm, Martha T. Mccluskey
Toward A Fundamental Right To Evade Law? The Rule Of Power In Shelby County And State Farm, Martha T. Mccluskey
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
The Blinding Color Of Race: Elections And Democracy In The Post-Shelby County Era, Sahar F. Aziz
The Blinding Color Of Race: Elections And Democracy In The Post-Shelby County Era, Sahar F. Aziz
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
One Step Forward, Two Steps Backward: How The Supreme Court’S Decision In Shelby County V. Holder Eviscerated The Voting Rights Act And What Civil Rights Advocates Should Do About It, Pamela Edwards
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Unseen Exclusions In Voting And Immigration Law, César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández
Unseen Exclusions In Voting And Immigration Law, César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Frederick Douglass On Shelby County, Olympia Duhart
Frederick Douglass On Shelby County, Olympia Duhart
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Shelby County V. Holder: A Critical Analysis Of The Post-Racial Movement’S Relationship To Bystander Denial And Its Effect On Perceptions Of Ongoing Discrimination In Voting, Abra S. Mason
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Electoral Silver Linings After Shelby, Citizens United And Bennett, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy
Electoral Silver Linings After Shelby, Citizens United And Bennett, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Still Fighting After All These Years: Minority Voting Rights 50 Years After The March On Washington, Deborah N. Archer
Still Fighting After All These Years: Minority Voting Rights 50 Years After The March On Washington, Deborah N. Archer
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Justice Ginsburg's Umbrella, Ellen D. Katz
Justice Ginsburg's Umbrella, Ellen D. Katz
Book Chapters
Near the end of her dissent in Shelby County v. Holder, Justice Ginsburg suggested a simple analogy to illustrate why the regional protections of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) were still necessary. She wrote that “[t]hrowing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.”
Enforcing The Fifteenth Amendment, Ellen D. Katz
Enforcing The Fifteenth Amendment, Ellen D. Katz
Book Chapters
This chapter examines efforts to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment in the period from United States v. Reese through Shelby County v. Holder. Reese and Shelby County expose the most rigorous stance the Court has employed to review congressional efforts to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment, while the years in-between show Congress and the Court working more in tandem, at times displaying remarkable indifference to blatant violations of the Fifteenth Amendment, and elsewhere working cooperatively to help vindicate the Amendment’s promise. Defying simple explanation, this vacillation between cooperation and resistance captures the complex and deeply consequential way concerns about federal power, …
Judicial Diversity After Shelby County V. Holder, William Roth
Judicial Diversity After Shelby County V. Holder, William Roth
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
In 2014, voters in ten of the fifteen states previously covered by the Voting Rights Act ("VRA") preclearance formula-including six of the nine states covered in their entirety-will go to the polls to elect or retain state supreme court justices. Yet despite the endemic underrepresentation of minorities on state benches and the judiciary's traditional role in fighting discrimination, scholars have seemingly paid little attention to how Shelby County v. Holder's suspension of the coverage formula in section 4(b) has left racial minorities vulnerable to retrogressive changes to judicial-election laws. The first election year following Shelby County thus provides a compelling …
Dismissing Deterrence, Ellen D. Katz
Dismissing Deterrence, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
The proposed Voting Rights Amendment Act of 20144 (VRAA)[...]’s new criteria defining when jurisdictions become subject to preclearance are acutely responsive to the concerns articulated in Shelby County[ v. Holder]. The result is a preclearance regime that, if enacted, would operate in fewer places and demand less from those it regulates. This new regime, however, would not only be more targeted and less powerful, but, curiously, more vulnerable to challenge. In fact, the regime would be more vulnerable precisely because it is so responsive to Shelby County. Some background will help us see why.
What Was Wrong With The Record?, Ellen D. Katz
What Was Wrong With The Record?, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Shelby County v. Holder offers three reasons for why the record Congress amassed to support the 2006 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) was legally insufficient to justify the statute's continued regional application: (1) the problems Congress documented in 2006 were not as severe as those that prompted it to craft the regime in 1965; (2) these problems did not lead Congress to alter the statute's pre-existing coverage formula; and (3) these problems did not exclusively involve voter registration and the casting of ballots.
A Cure Worse Than The Disease?, Ellen D. Katz
A Cure Worse Than The Disease?, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
The pending challenge to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act insists the statute is no longer necessary. Should the Supreme Court agree, its ruling is likely to reflect the belief that section 5 is not only obsolete but that its requirements do more harm today than the condition it was crafted to address. In this Essay, Professor Ellen D. Katz examines why the Court might liken section 5 to a destructive treatment and why reliance on that analogy in the pending case threatens to leave the underlying condition unaddressed and Congress without the power to address it.